Swinger

Read in the news lately, that the argies are kicking off over the Falkland Islands again (Malvinas as they call them).

It got me thinking, that with all of our current commitments around the world, and shortage of various equipment, from ships and planes, to working radios. How would we cope with another invasion??
Anyone got any interesting ideas on how we would re-take the islands?

War Hero

LE

I share your concerns ex_sigs. Presumably the Argies would put a bit more effort in this time having been severely butt-fcuked last time. That would leave us needing to up our game to give them a further dose of the same treatment. Could we do it with our smaller army, greater other commitments, and, er, less than perfect equipment state?

In theory the yanks owe us big time for our support before, during and after Gulf War II. It would be interesting to see if being the best mate of the playground bully works both ways or only one. I suspect that I already know the answer to that one.

LE

Old-Salt

Just remember that this is all just election hype as it very popular to the Argies in the south, also that this time they wont be able to sneak onto the island as there are considerable more military there this time.

Old-Salt

Our armed forces are virtually unrecognisable to the ones which made up the Task Force in 1982. I suspect we might struggle to beat Argentina in the way we did last time and I reckon they are aware of this!! I'm not saying we would lose, God forbid, but our last victory in the Falklands was comprehenive despite some heavy losses at sea. We have suffered a 40% reduction in the regular British Army since 1982, when you have to remember we also had the second largest navy in NATO - The Royal Navy is nowhere near that strength anymore!! If they want another go at the islands, there isn't much we can do to prevent that from the UK but we might have to prepare for "one bloody battle royal" !!

LE

Must have a few tomahawk available couple of nuclear subs would make the sea crossing intresting plus mount pleaseant airport
gives the crabs somewhere to fly from .Unless the argies sneak a huge armada cross without notice .Guess all the army would do is round up any surviors who make it too the shores .You could always trident the invasion force let it get 100miles off shore then bang

Old-Salt

I would leave the Islands, and directly attack the mainland USA style ..... hit their ports and airfields with cruise missles, let our subs hit anything going into an exclusion zone around the islands or along the Argentinian coast.

Then if they still complain and refuse to withdraw from the 'FALKLAND ISLANDS' give them instant sunshine on their southern tip as stronger warning.

J

"Medals are not to prove how brave you are.... They are to prove you survived." Spike Milligan.

Old-Salt

They would have a job getting onto the islands though.before the falklands war there was a token force of marines on the islands, now there are more service personnel than their are inhabitants. if the argies couldnt hold a defensive position, how the hell could they assult one?

The opinions contained in the above post are not necessarily those of the British Army, the owners of ARRSE, or the poster

LE

UK forces are already dug in, there are posts on all the high ground. there is a road network for moving troops to beachheads ( A luxury the Argies never had)

The Argies have had a faster decline in their Military than even we have!

The UN have passed a resolution declaring it as independant of Argentina making an Argentine invasion an act against hte un not just Hm govt. (although it seems the security counsel can be ignored if you want.)

There are three hundred miles of ocean that any invasion force owuld have to cross. which is more than enough to launch an interdiction. Unless their Specials that did such a good job of destroying an empty marines Barrack block in episode one can manage to Neutralise all of MPA before the invasion fleet arrives.

There are minefields all over the beaches thanks to episode one. Im sure that we could sly some extra minefields ahead of any beach landing and claim that pedro and miguel had left them from last time.

Swinger

In todays "blairs britain" im suprised that we havent just given the Argies the Islands in a goodwill act. I honestly believe if we did not have military might on the islands and they tried it on again Blair would not give a s*it and try to explain that it was theres all along.

Old-Salt

In todays "blairs britain" im suprised that we havent just given the Argies the Islands in a goodwill act. I honestly believe if we did not have military might on the islands and they tried it on again Blair would not give a s*it and try to explain that it was theres all along.

And you really dont think blair would want to take back the falklands at all costs just to show he is just as good as winston churchill or thatcher so he could have his legacy as "the great ober-fuhrer of britain" ? I reckon blair would be spoiling for a fight, without quite realising that after defence cuts we cant actually punch above our weight anymore...With the obvious consequences

Old-Salt

I share your concerns ex_sigs. Presumably the Argies would put a bit more effort in this time having been severely butt-fcuked last time. That would leave us needing to up our game to give them a further dose of the same treatment. Could we do it with our smaller army, greater other commitments, and, er, less than perfect equipment state?

In theory the yanks owe us big time for our support before, during and after Gulf War II. It would be interesting to see if being the best mate of the playground bully works both ways or only one. I suspect that I already know the answer to that one.

I wouldn't want the Yanks involved - any war over a British territory is a colonial thing and we would be best sorting it out ourselves. America chose not to get involved last time as Argentina was, and is classed as, a friendly nation. I think Thatcher may also have told Regan to keep his 'neb' out too!! I think Argentina need a proverbial 'shot across the bow' to avoid any 'misunderstandings' later on!!

Swinger

Never mind the politics................. (the Argies have never stopped banging on about Las Malvinas)........

I'd love to see the Argies trying to counter a British Airborne/ Amphibious assault with modern technology on the battlefield. Somehow I don't think their "Dad's Army" could handle one of the most highly trained and deployable forces in the world!

"i love the smell of napalm in the morning - smells like............victory."

War Hero

Never mind the politics................. (the Argies have never stopped banging on about Las Malvinas)........

I'd love to see the Argies trying to counter a British Airborne/ Amphibious assault with modern technology on the battlefield. Somehow I don't think their "Dad's Army" could handle one of the most highly trained and deployable forces in the world!

Yeah i dont' doubt the modern Brit Army would kick the vintage backsides of the Argentine Forces, but 2 things,

1. They are not suffering defence cuts and over strech like the UK Forces (Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia/Kosovo, Northern Ireland, you name it)

2. Its their back yard in terms of flight time, so they have air power to hand. Remember our Royal Navy suffered awfully to their exocet misslies, and we don't have the huge aircraft carriers any more, and the Fleet Air Arm is running out of service of the Harriers, so there is less capability on our side now.

But of course you now have MPA and its local garrison, so its more than enough of a deterent to keep the Argies from invading what is Soverign British Territory, but would British Forces be able to mount a 1982 style liberation when we are over streched? I don't think it would be possible....... look at the debate of where to find troops to send to the proposed UN force BLiar has suggested?

Clanker

Just wanted to add my tuppence worth, having recently returned from "Down South".

1. MPA wouldnt really do much other defend itself, as much of the personnell are RAF, (and i'm not slagging them off, they do the jobs that they joined up for to a fine standard) but they're really only trained in defence, and don't have any clue about ground tactics or soldiering skills. The infantry we have there are cracking, but not of any huge size.

2. You would still need to sail or fly a force down there, so no matter what is said, it will still take time to muster a liberating force, by which time, no matter how strapped for cash, the argies would have occupied and dug in.

3. If they have half an ounce of brain cell, they would have learnt lessons from the last time around, and will be better prepared. The actual soldiers themselves were quite a formidable foe, they were just let down by poor leadership and poor logistics.

4. Do we still have the national pride that we had in '82, and the public faith in the Armed forces and our government?

5. We still have a fantastic fighting army, and our logistics are better, but could our navy cope? Could our support arms cope? who knows, however no matter what were still the best army in the world and a nation that excells at diplomatic, political and green espionage, intelligence gathering and generally being a sneaky bunch of bastards!

We'd win if we fought for it, but who knows at what cost and how it would affect the army and the nation as a whole.